Posted on 12/09/2001 9:59:41 PM PST by Don Myers
Survey finds 10 partners before marriage 'normal'
The majority of young people think it is normal for a person to have at least 10 sexual partners before marriage.
A survey has also found that three in 10 believe it is acceptable for a girl to lose her virginity before the age of 15.
Research carried out by Brook, the youth sex advisory service, says there is a "cultural change" in young people's attitudes towards sex.
Some 64% of men and 54% of women agreed that it was acceptable for a person to sleep with more than 10 partners before getting married.
But the survey, which questioned people aged 17 to 25, also showed that they wanted more information about sex and contraception.
Men admitted to getting most of their knowledge about contraception from TV and magazines, while women learned the most from magazines and their mothers.
Half of all the young women surveyed said they wished that teachers had supplied them with more information about preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
Brook chief executive Jan Barlow said: "Young people have an increasing number of sexual partners and they are saying that's OK.
"But at the same time they don't have the information and access to services that they need.
"Young people must seek out advice and information in order to make their choices and to understand how to protect themselves both against pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases."
I doubt there is really any accurate way to determine cheating by religion, so let's not even try to go there.
From some of your earlier comments, I gather that you think that following a no premarital sex policy might result in the failure of one spouse in being able to identify frigidity in the other. What you are saying is possible, although somehow I doubt it.
Even if it is the case, that still doesn't disprove that as a general rule, premarital sex causes more problems that it could ever solve.
Very nice.... I AM a Christian.
Here is the statement I found so offensive:
If America does not return to Christ soon, it will deserve to be dominated by the Muslims.
I objected to this statement and referred to the poster as a member of the 'Talibornagain' for very obvious reasons.
Because I object to America somehow deserving to be run by the Taliban I'm showing animus toward Christians?
You haven't answered my question. It's a fair question. I'd appreciate an answer. Thank you.
I doubt it, though I would be delighted if you could prove me wrong. I sincerely strive to eliminate inconsistencies in my thinking and I will gladly clarify any thing I've said as it relates to other topics if consistency is in doubt. However, some things to keep in mind when reading my posts:
1.) I switch between different contexts to properly match that of the person I am addressing where appropriate. In other words, I will argue a point based on the assumptions of someone else, when in fact I don't believe the assumptions themselves are true. That there are multiple useful perspectives and that I am willing to use them all where appropriate in a discussion is confusing to some people with respect to my personal opinions. However, in most of the discussions I get involved in, my motive is to clarify fact not promote my opinion; my opinion is largely irrelevant and I only rarely mention it in a discussion (and usually make it quite clear that it is strictly my opinion when I do).
2.) I will sometimes tear apart the argument of someone using faulty logic even if I agree with the conclusion. Getting the right answer by accident is just as bad as getting the wrong answer in my book. Even though I may disagree with a person, I may not disagree with their conclusion even though it may appear otherwise.
This isn't intended as a slight against freepers, but I am used to discussing things online with a uniformly sophisticated audience, whereas freepers seem to range from brilliant to juvenile. How my posts are interpreted here are therefore somewhat varied.
10 Simple Rules for dating my daughter
1. If you pull into my driveway and honk you'd better be delivering a package, because you're sure not picking anything up.
2. You do not touch my daughter in front of me. You may glance at her, so long as you do not peer at anything below her neck. If you cannot keep your eyes or hands off of my daughter's body, I will remove them.
3. I am aware that it is considered fashionable for boys of your age to wear their trousers so loosely that they appear to be falling off their hips. Please don't take this as an insult, but you and all of your friends are complete idiots. Still, I want to be fair and open minded about this issue, so I propose this compromise: You may come to the door with your underwear showing and your pants ten sizes too big, and I will not object. However, In order to ensure that your clothes do not, in fact, come off during the course of your date with my daughter, I will take my electric nail gun and fasten your trousers securely in place to your waist.
4. I'm sure you've been told that in today's world, sex without utilizing a "barrier method" of some kind can kill you. Let me elaborate: when it comes to sex, I am the barrier, and I will kill you.
5. In order for us to get to know each other, we should talk about sports, politics, and other issues of the day. Please do not do this. The only information I require from you is an indication of when you expect to have my daughter safely back at my house, and the only word I need from you on this subject is "early."
6. I have no doubt you are a popular fellow, with many opportunities to date other girls. This is fine with me as long as it is okay with my daughter. Otherwise, once you have gone out with my little girl, you will continue to date no one but her until she is finished with you. If you make her cry, I will make you cry.
7. As you stand in my front hallway, waiting for my daughter to appear, and more than an hour goes by, do not sigh and fidget. If you want to be on time for the movie, you should not be dating. My daughter is putting on her makeup, a process that can take longer than painting the Golden Gate Bridge. Instead of just standing there, why don't you do something useful, like changing the oil in my car?
8. The following places are not appropriate for a date with my daughter: Places where there are beds, sofas, or anything softer than a wooden stool. Places where there are no parents, policemen, or nuns within eyesight. Places where there is darkness. Places where there is dancing, holding hands, or happiness. Places where the ambient temperature is warm enough to induce my daughter to wear shorts, tank tops, midriff T-shirts, or anything other than overalls, a sweater, and a goose down parka zipped up to her throat. Movies with a strong romantic or sexual theme are to be avoided; movies which feature chainsaws are okay. Hockey games are okay. Old folks homes are better.
9. Do not lie to me. I may appear to be a pot-bellied, balding, middle-aged, dim-witted has-been. But on issues relating to my daughter, I am the all-knowing, merciless god of your universe. If I ask you where you are going and with whom, you have one chance to tell me the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I have a shotgun, a shovel, and five acres behind the house. Do not trifle with me.
10. Be afraid. Be very afraid. It takes very little for me to mistake the sound of your car in the driveway for a chopper coming in over a rice paddy outside of Hanoi. When my Agent Orange starts acting up, the voices in my head frequently tell me to clean the guns as I wait for you to bring my daughter home. As soon as you pull into the driveway you should exit your car with both hands in plain sight. Speak the perimeter password, announce in a clear voice that you have brought my daughter home safely and early, then return to your car - there is no need for you to come inside. The camouflaged face at the window is mine.
This just proves my point. I wasn't talking about imagination. I'm talking about the emotional and spiritual connection between a man and a woman who love and are married to each other that happens at a level much higher than the physical. And it can only happen to married couples, because the lifelong commitment is an important part of the recipe. As good as it can be, the sexual act is merely a physical manifestation of it.
It seems as though you may never experience what I'm talking about. That makes me sad, because it's as close to one of the greatest reasons for living there is.
You can object to the idea all you want, but when you start calling other people names and accusing them of obviously wrong beliefs, you've crossed the line, and your Christianity is questionable. In all the places where you've spread your filth, you have yet to show any concern for the sins which are being committed in America, sins of murder of the unborn, homosexuality, drug addiction, and idolatry of many sorts. I want a straight answer from you: Do you believe God is blind to these sins because this is America??? That somehow America is exempt from God's scrutiny? That God will give America a "pass" on her sins because we are a "Christian" nation? You're real good at throwing mud, but now we're the ones standing here with the mudballs, and it's your turn to speak. It's high time you either put up or shut up. The term Talibornagain is offensive, uncalled for, evil, and not worthy of a Christian. If you persist in throwing that term at Christians who are speaking their concern about our country and its condition, you will be reported and banned.
I don't need studies because I am not making an assertion. I am merely pointing out why the statistics won't be meaningful. Any statistical study that did not control for this factor is worthless. This is how science is done: someone publishes a paper and everyone else tears it apart looking for flaws in the methodology and control. Sociological studies are particularly bad in this regard, largely because there are so many factors that are difficult to control for (which is also why you can "prove" damn near anything in sociology). It is intellectually dishonest to stand behind a study that has been shown to have flaws in the methodology no matter how much you like the results. Statistics built on a flawed methodology are meaningless. It just so happens that I am familiar with a couple of these cohabitation studies (which were done in several countries) and none of them were sufficiently rigorous (regardless of which way the results swayed) to be considered evidence of anything.
So by selecting someone who does not believe in cohabitation, you are more likely to get someone who also does nt believe in divorce, thus locating a spouse who will be dedicated to making the marriage work or not marrying at all.
Thanks for making that point. Hee hee hee.
Why would you live in such a wicked country as America?
Good luck, despite your self-imposed disadvantages.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.